Association Between Augmentation Index and Total Sleep Time in Night Shift Workers.

Augmentation index and pulse wave velocity are markers of vascular compromise and independent predictors of cardiovascular risk and mortality. While the link between shift work and heightened cardiovascular risk is established, the intricate genesis of early cardiovascular outcomes in shift workers remains incompletely understood. However, there is evidence that sleep duration plays a role in this regard. Here we evaluate the association of total sleep time with pulse wave velocity, augmentation index, and central blood pressure in night shift workers. This study cross-sectionally evaluated the association of total sleep time evaluated by 10-day monitoring actigraphy with augmentation index, pulse wave velocity, and brachial and central blood pressure evaluated by oscillometry in nursing professionals, 63 shift workers (89% women; age = 45.0 ± 10.5 years), and 17 (100% women; age = 41.8 ± 15.6) day workers. There were no differences in the studied variables between shift workers and day workers. Results of correlation analysis demonstrated that pulse wave velocity, central systolic blood pressure, central diastolic blood pressure, brachial systolic blood pressure, and brachial diastolic blood pressure tended to have significant correlation with each other, while these measures did not have a significant relationship with augmentation index in both groups. However, results of adjusted restricted cubic spline analysis showed a U-shaped-curve association between total sleep time and augmentation index (p < 0.001 for trend) with a nadir at 300-360 min of total sleep time in shift workers. The present study showed that total sleep time, assessed by actigraphy, had a U-shaped association with augmentation index in shift workers, which indicated better characteristics of vascular functionality when sleep time was 5-6 h in the workers studied.

Accuracy of screening strategies for masked hypertension: a large-scale nationwide study based on home blood pressure monitoring.

This study compared the ability of guideline-proposed office blood pressure (OBP) screening thresholds [European Society of Hypertension (ESH) guidelines: 130/85 mmHg for individuals with an OBP < 140/90 mmHg; American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines: 120/75 mmHg for individuals with an OBP < 130/80 mmHg] and novel screening scores to identify normotensive individuals at high risk of having masked hypertension (MH) in an office setting. We cross-sectionally evaluated untreated participants with an OBP < 140/90 mmHg (n = 22,266) and an OBP < 130/80 mmHg (n = 10,005) who underwent home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) (derivation cohort) from 686 Brazilian sites. MH was defined according to criteria suggested by the ESH (OBP < 140/90 mmHg; HBPM ≥ 135/85 mmHg), Brazilian Society of Cardiology (BSC) (OBP < 140/90 mmHg; HBPM ≥ 130/80 mmHg) and ACC/AHA (OBP < 130/80 mmHg; HBPM ≥ 130/80 mmHg). Scores were generated from multivariable logistic regression coefficients between MH and clinical variables (OBP, age, sex, and BMI). Considering the ESH, BSC, and ACC/AHA criteria, 17.2%, 38.5%, and 21.2% of the participants had MH, respectively. Guideline-proposed OBP screening thresholds yielded area under curve (AUC) values of 0.640 (for ESH criteria), 0.641 (for BSC criteria), and 0.619 (for ACC/AHA criteria) for predicting MH, while scores presented as continuous variables or quartiles yielded AUC values of 0.700 and 0.688 (for ESH criteria), 0.720 and 0.709 (for BSC criteria), and 0.671 and 0.661 (for ACC/AHA criteria), respectively. Further analyses performed with alternative untreated participants (validation cohort; n = 2807 with an OBP < 140/90 mmHg; n = 1269 with an OBP < 130/80 mmHg) yielded similar AUC values. In conclusion, the accuracy of guideline-proposed OBP screening thresholds in identifying individuals at high risk of having MH in an office setting is limited and is inferior to that yielded by scores derived from simple clinical variables.

Discrepancies in the diagnosis of hypertension in adolescents according to available office and home high blood pressure criteria.

This study aimed at comparing the prevalence of abnormal blood pressure (BP) phenotypes among 241 adolescents referred for hypertension (15.4 ± 1.4 years, 62% males, 40% obese) according to mostly used or available criteria for hypertension [AAP or ESH criteria for high office BP (OBP); Arsakeion or Goiânia schools' criteria for high home BP monitoring (HBPM)]. High OBP prevalence was greater when defined by AAP compared with ESH criteria (43.5% vs. 24.5%; p < .001), while high HBPM prevalence was similar between Arsakeion and Goiânia criteria (33.5% and 37.5%; p = .34). Fifty-five percent of the sample fulfilled at least one criterion for high BP, but only 31% of this subsample accomplished all four criteria. Regardless of the HBPM criteria, AAP thresholds were associated with lower prevalence of normotension and masked hypertension and greater prevalence of white-coat and sustained hypertension than ESH thresholds. These findings support the need to standardize the definition of hypertension among adolescents.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on blood pressure control: a nationwide home blood pressure monitoring study.

There are concerns that hypertension control may decrease during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on office blood pressure (OBP) and home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) control in a large Brazilian nationwide sample. The results of an adjusted spline analysis evaluating the trajectory of OBP and HBPM control from 01/Jan/2019 to 31/Dec/2020 among independent participants who were untreated (n = 24,227) or treated (n = 27,699) with antihypertensive medications showed a modest and transient improvement in OBP control among treated individuals, which was restricted to the early months following the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. Furthermore, slight reductions in OBP and HBPM values were detected in the early months following the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak among treated (n = 987) participants for whom blood pressure measurements before and during the pandemic were available, but not among untreated (n = 495) participants. In conclusion, we found no major adverse influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on OBP and HBPM control in a large nationwide sample.

Ambulatory blood pressure phenotypes and isolated elevation of office central or brachial blood pressure.

Disagreements in office brachial and central blood pressure (BP) have resulted in the identification of novel hypertension phenotypes, namely isolated central hypertension (ICH) and isolated brachial hypertension (IBH). This study investigated the relationship of ICH and IBH with ambulatory BP phenotypes among 753 individuals (mean age = 47.6 ± 15.2 years, 48% males) who underwent office and 24-hours brachial and central BP measures using a Mobil-O-Graph PWA monitor. Thresholds for elevated office central and brachial BP were 130/90 and 140/90 mm Hg. Results of multivariable analysis adjusted for potential confounders showed that ICH (n = 25) had 3.71-fold (95% CI 1.48-9.32; P = .005) greater risk of masked hypertension than normal brachial/central BP (n = 362), while IBH (n = 20) had 4.65-fold (95% CI 1.76-12.25; P = .002) greater risk of white coat hypertension compared with combined brachial/central hypertension (n = 346). These findings suggest that the diagnosis of ICH and IBH might be useful in identifying individuals at higher risk of presenting discordant office and ambulatory BP phenotypes.

Reference values of office central blood pressure, pulse wave velocity, and augmentation index recorded by means of the Mobil-O-Graph PWA monitor.

Assessment of central blood pressure (BP), pulse wave velocity (PWV), and augmentation index (AIx) measurements may improve cardiovascular risk stratification. This study aimed to establish reference office values for central BP, PWV, and AIx by means of a Mobil-O-Graph PWA monitor and to evaluate the impact of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) on these measurements. We cross-sectionally evaluated clinical characteristics, central BP, PWV, AIx, and peripheral BP measurements among 867 apparently healthy individuals (age = 46.0 ± 15.5 years, 39% males) who were free of obesity, hypertension, active smoking, dyslipidemia, and diabetes (CVRF-No) and 5632 individuals (age = 57.0 ± 14.7 years, 44% males) with at least one of these major CVRFs (CVRF-Yes). Reference values for central BP, PWV, and AIx were provided for the CVRF-No and CVRF-Yes groups, stratified by age and sex. PWV and AIx exhibited curvilinear increases with age, and there was an interaction between age and sex for central systolic BP and PWV in both the CVRF-No and CVRF-Yes groups. The results of a multivariable analysis including the whole sample (n = 6499) showed that obesity had a direct association with central BP, while diabetes was directly related to PWV. In addition, alcohol intake was directly associated with central BP, while performance of physical activity was inversely related to AIx. In conclusion, values of office-measured central BP, PWV, and AIx obtained in an apparently healthy population and in a population with CVRFs are now available according to age and sex and may be useful to build thresholds for use in clinical practice.

Impact of hypertension phenotypes on the office and 24-h pulse wave velocity and augmentation index in individuals with or without antihypertensive medication use.

Data on the association of blood pressure (BP) phenotypes with office and out-of-office markers of vascular stiffness and pressure wave reflection are sparse. This study investigated office and 24-h measures of brachial BP, pulse wave velocity (PWV), and central augmentation index (AIx) across hypertension phenotypes among individuals not using BP-lowering medications [normotension (NT), white-coat hypertension (WH), masked hypertension (MH) and sustained hypertension (SH)] and those using BP-lowering medications [controlled hypertension (CH), white-coat uncontrolled hypertension (WUCH), masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) and sustained uncontrolled hypertension (SUCH)]. We evaluated 454 untreated (age = 45 ± 15 years, 50% males) and 238 treated (age = 52 ± 15 years, 45% males) individuals who underwent office and 24-h brachial BP, PWV, and AIx measures using a Mobil-O-Graph PWA monitor. In the analysis adjusted for age and sex, WH had higher (p < 0.05) office PWV (7.53 ± 0.09 vs 6.89 ± 0.05), office AIx (27.9 ± 1.3 vs 23.8 ± 0.8), and daytime AIx (24.6 ± 0.7 vs 22.7 ± 0.4) compared with those of NT, while WUCH had higher (p < 0.05) office PWV (8.28 ± 0.11 vs 7.43 ± 0.08) and 24-h PWV (7.54 ± 0.09 vs 7.21 ± 0.07) than those of CH. MH had higher (p < 0.05) 24-h PWV (7.00 ± 0.09 vs 6.69 ± 0.04) and 24-h AIx (24.3 ± 0.9 vs 21.9 ± 0.4) than those of NT, whereas MUCH had higher (p < 0.05) 24-h PWV (7.64 ± 0.13 vs 7.21 ± 0.07) than that of CH. Lastly, SH or SUCH had significantly higher office and 24-h PWV and AIx than those of NT and CH, respectively. In conclusion, these results suggest that individuals with masked BP phenotypes are more predisposed to have adverse out-of-office vascular characteristics, while individuals with white-coat phenotypes have adverse office and out-of-office vascular characteristics compared with those of individuals with normal BP levels.